- #7 of 11
-
Re: Honda Fit vs Mazda Protege 5 [katraak]
by douglas7
-
May 22, 2007 (5:52 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: katraak (Apr 21, 2006 6:35 pm)
The message on the board is dated a year ago. Do you still have your P5? My advice to anyone is obtain a low mileage Japanese (preferably Mazda) car and look after it. I have a 323 that I purchased expected to get a year out of it. That was in 1996 and it is still as reliable as ever. Keep your Protege until it is no longer financially viable ... likely ten to fifteen years. Honda are great cars but to trade one Japanese vehicle for another with such low kilometers would be a waste of money.
cheers
jd
|
- #8 of 11
-
Re: a good comparason for you... [inaudible]
by eldaino
-
May 24, 2007 (6:30 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: inaudible (Jun 05, 2006 10:32 pm)
where did you get your armrest from?
the protege 5 didn't have one either though...
my wife had a 2003 sport auto, before we traded it for the rabbit, and while she liked it at first, it had suspension and transmission problems and gave bad mpg for how big the engine was...its the reason she won't consider the 3 hatch (or mazda in general) and would totally prefer the fit. IT was a sporty drive, but it did rattle a bit.
|
- #9 of 11
-
PR5 vs Fit
by mustangleader
-
Apr 23, 2009 (11:43 pm)
-
|
You've got to be kidding. I drove the fit and no way it compares to the PR5. Yes, I added a megnaflow muffler system, K&N cold air filter, and did have my computer reprogramed but all for less than $800. I bought my PR5 out the door for $15,000 in 2002. As you may read from others, PR5 drives like a sport car/go kart. The fit doesn't especially it sits higher. And Fit is a smaller. Subjectively, I think most would say the PR5 looks a lot more sporty.
With the aftermarket adjustments, PR5 is quicker than both the Fit & Mazda3. I get 31-32 miles on the highway. Have 170,000 miles. Do a lot of driving so I have to have a car that I enjoy for everyday driving. I have a couple of other cars, but this is the one I like to drive daily. I recommend buying a low mileage, used PR5 before spending the money for a Honda Fit.
|
- #10 of 11
-
Re: a good comparason for you... [inaudible]
by mustangleader
-
Jun 25, 2009 (11:54 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: inaudible (Jun 05, 2006 10:32 pm)
After reading this article, I have to disagree with the writer. I went and drove a Fit. It's sits higher than the PR5 which for me, takes the fun out compared to my 2002 PR5. I also own a Speed 3 which is a different car because it's a turbo, higher profile as well, and heavier. Purely from standpoint driving a car every day, I acturally prefer the PR5. Don't know whether the writer had a automatic or a heavy foot, but I get 25-26 miles in town and 32-34 highway, depending how fast I drive. The PR5 has been geared with low end torque which makes it's more usable than the Fit as well as the 2002 Matrix which required more rpms to get max torque. Though I never felt the car was underpowered, I added a K&N cold air filter, a megna flow exhaust system and had the computer reprogrammed. With these aftermarket equipment, I have the combination of acceleration and cornering that Fit can even come close to. Since I made these modifications early on (I have 172,000 miles now), I can't remember the acceleration back then but I was never unhappy with it though review of the PR5 bring this issue up. But I believe it was Car & Driver wrote, "Some cars performance numbers don't impress you but the Protege5 drives just feels right regardless." It rated number 1 against its competitors at that time which was the PT Cruiser, Matrix, Focus, Vibe, etc.
PR5 is better looking, bigger and drives like a sports car than the Fit I drove. I would recommend that if you have a PR5, I wouldn't trade it in for a Fit. if you can find a low milegage PR5, I buy and keep the difference than a new Fit. As every owner of a PR5 has written in places like Edmunds, these cars are mostly maintenance free. And they last!!!
|
- #11 of 11
-
Re: a good comparason for you... [inaudible]
by mustangleader
-
Jun 25, 2009 (11:58 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: inaudible (Jun 05, 2006 10:32 pm)
After reading this article, I have to add more than my earlier reply/statement to the writer who said the Fit is a better car than the PR5. I went and drove a Fit. It's sits higher than the PR5 which for me, takes the fun out compared to my 2002 PR5. I also own a Speed 3 which is a different car because it's a turbo, higher profile as well, and heavier. Purely from standpoint driving a car every day, I acturally prefer the PR5. Don't know whether the writer had a automatic or a heavy foot, but I get 25-26 miles in town and 32-34 highway, depending how fast I drive. The PR5 has been geared with low end torque which makes it's more usable than the Fit as well as the 2002 Matrix which required more rpms to get max torque. Though I never felt the car was underpowered, I added a K&N cold air filter, a megna flow exhaust system and had the computer reprogrammed. With these aftermarket equipment, I have the combination of acceleration and cornering that Fit can even come close to. Since I made these modifications early on (I have 172,000 miles now), I can't remember the acceleration back then but I was never unhappy with it though review of the PR5 bring this issue up. But I believe it was Car & Driver wrote, "Some cars performance numbers don't impress you but the Protege5 drives just feels right regardless." It rated number 1 against its competitors at that time which was the PT Cruiser, Matrix, Focus, Vibe, etc.
PR5 is better looking, bigger and drives like a sports car than the Fit I drove. I would recommend that if you have a PR5, I wouldn't trade it in for a Fit. if you can find a low milegage PR5, I buy and keep the difference than a new Fit. As every owner of a PR5 has written in places like Edmunds, these cars are mostly maintenance free. And they last!!!
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hatchbacks 
